IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/gbusec/v20y2018i4p503-520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Organisational management culture and employers' health insurance offering strategies in the USA: an Ubuntu-based random utility modelling approach

Author

Listed:
  • Ibrahim Niankara

Abstract

This article takes an approach to explaining the behavioural manifestations of the decision making in US companies' offer of health insurance that is grounded not only on their cost minimising behaviour, but also in a humanness dimension based on the African concept of Ubuntu, and the Random Utility framework. The choice process is modelled as a tripartite decision making, using a nationally representative random sample of 1,061 US companies from the Dunn and Bradstreet Business data. The results show that the relationship between management culture and health plan offering strategy is dependent on other relevant covariates, which when left out, leads to the problem of omitted variables bias. However, when all variables are included exogenously in this relationship, it results in management culture not affecting significantly companies' scope of plan offering. When the exogeneity assumption is relaxed through recursively Bivariate Probit modelling, a highly significant management culture effect is observed, as companies with groups and formal committee management culture are seen to be 1.58 times less likely to choose a multiple plan strategy over a single plan strategy.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibrahim Niankara, 2018. "Organisational management culture and employers' health insurance offering strategies in the USA: an Ubuntu-based random utility modelling approach," Global Business and Economics Review, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(4), pages 503-520.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:gbusec:v:20:y:2018:i:4:p:503-520
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=92767
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:gbusec:v:20:y:2018:i:4:p:503-520. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=168 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.